12:11 I have become a fool. You yourselves forced me to do it, for I should have been commended by you. For I lack nothing in comparison to those “super-apostles,” even though I am nothing. 12:12 Indeed, the signs of an apostle were performed among you with great perseverance by signs and wonders and powerful deeds.

Two questions may be raised.  An exegetical question: do these ‘signs of an apostle’ to refer to miracle-working, or more broadly to a life and ministry consistent with that of an apostle?  A theological question: was miracle-working restricted (or nearly restricted) to the apostles?

1. Miracles?

Some think that these ‘signs of an apostle’ are the ‘signs and wonders and powerful deeds’ mentioned immediately after.  The NIV reflects this understanding.

Kruse seems content with this interpretation.  He compares Rom 15:17-19, penned shortly after penning 2 Cor. Clearly, the performance of such miraculous signs was a normal accompaniment of Paul’s ministry, and in this respect his work in Corinth had been no exception.

Paul, then, is in no way inferior to his opponents in the matter of performance of miraculous signs. Acts records some of these, eg 2 Cor 14:8-10; 16:16-18. The account of Paul’s first visit to Corinth in Acts 18 records no miracles, but obviously such had been carried out, otherwise the present claim would make no sense.

Note that Paul does not try to prove these miracles: he asserts them in a matter-of-fact way.

These offered tangible evidence to the doubters that Paul’s credentials as an apostle ordained by God were sound. These are to be distinguished from the various extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, 1 Cor 12:4-11, which were not limited to the apostles (or, as far as we can tell) to the apostolic age.

2. The life and ministry of an apostle?

Others think that ‘the signs of an apostle’ are Paul’s life and ministry.  This is supported by a literal translation: ‘The signs of an apostle were performed among you in all endurance with (or, accompanied by) signs and wonders and miracles.’  If this reading is correct, the case is weakened for regarding this verse as implying that signs, wonders and miracles were the exclusive provenance of the apostles.

According to this view,

‘The “signs of a true apostle” are listed in chapters 10-12, not merely in the much-quoted verse. They include powerful preaching that breaks down menal strongholds (10:1-6); the privilege of first bringing the gospel to these people (10-13-18); faithfulness to divine truth (11:1-6); unwillingness to be a financial burden to his converts (11:7-11); the endurance of great hardship and suffering for the gospel (11:22-33); a deeply personal semi-ecstatic experience which he does not describe (12:1-6); and the “patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works” (curious combination), 12:11-13. None of these factors is unique to apostles.’ (Bridge, Signs and wonders today, 173f)

Grudem (Systematic Theology, p362) adopts a similar view:

‘The “signs” of an apostle are best understood as everything that characterized Paul’s apostolic mission and showed him to be a true apostle. We need not guess at what these signs were, for elsewhere in 2 Corinthians Paul tells what marked him as a true apostle:

1. Spiritual power in conflict with evil (2 Cor 10:3–4, 8–11; 13:2–4, 10)

2. Jealous care for the welfare of the churches (2 Cor 11:1–6)

3. True knowledge of Jesus and his gospel plan (2 Cor 11:6)

4. Self-support (selflessness) (2 Cor 11:7–11)

5. Not taking advantage of churches; not striking people physically (2 Cor 11:20–21)

6. Suffering and hardship endured for Christ (2 Cor 11:23–29)

7. Being caught up into heaven (2 Cor 12:1–6)

8. Contentment and faith to endure a thorn in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7–9)

9. Gaining strength out of weakness (2 Cor 12:10).’

Discussion

The contributor to Harper’s Bible Commentary seems to accept elements of both interpretations. Like the ‘super-apostles’, Paul too

‘has performed the healings and other signs that the Corinthians have been led to expect of a true apostle (v. 12), although he does not belabor this point. From the way he refers to these in other Letters (notably Rom. 15:18–19; Gal. 3:1–5), it is clear that he regards his preaching of the gospel, not his performance of wondrous deeds, as the truly definitive evidence of apostleship.’

G.H. Trelftree notes:

1. the phrase ‘signs of an apostle’ may have come from the Corinthians, or from Paul’s opponents;
2. since Paul’s opponents seem to have performed miracles, Paul does not rely completely on them as attestations of his apostleship.  Indeed Paul teaches in 2 Thess 5:9 and elsewhere that even Satan can perform (or seem to perform) miracles;
3. in the present letter, Paul bases his authenticity as an apostle on ‘his holy life of dependence on God (2 Cor 5:18–21; cf. 3:1–3), as well as on his own spiritual experience (2 Cor 1:12; 2:17; 4:2; 7:2), his suffering and weakness through which the power of God is seen (2 Cor 4:7–15; 6:4–10; 11:21–33), and the reconciliation that has taken place between the Corinthians and God (2 Cor 12:1–6).’

‘Thus’, Twelftree concludes:

‘the miracles along with his life of patient suffering in proclaiming the gospel and the experience of the Corinthians are the proof of his apostleship and the truth of his message, for in all of these the power of God can be seen (2 Cor 12:9).’

(DPL, art. ‘Signs, wonders, miracles’)

In any case, this verse should not be pushed so far as to make it say that miracles are the exclusive provenance of apostles. For this would fly in the face of 1 Cor 12:10,28-29. Rather, it should be understood as teaching that apostles would work miracles on a more regular basis. (Fee) This is consistent with the view that miracles do not occur evenly across biblical history (or across history generally, for that matter). Miracles are clustered around four major epochs – (a) Moses, Exodus, and the giving of the Law; (b) Elijah and Elisha; (c) the Lord Jesus Christ and his earthly ministry; (d) the apostles.

Fee regards it as ‘extremely doubtful’ that Paul regarded the working of miracles to be the exclusive province of apostleship.  In 1 Cor 12:10, 28f gifts of miracles and healings are ministries within the Christian congregation, quite unrelated to apostleship.  What Paul is affirming here, then, is that since miraculous gifts were found amongst believers generally, they were also to be expected to accompany the ministry of an apostle such as himself.

Stott, whose approach may be characterised as ‘open but cautious’, comments:

‘There may well be situations in which miracles are appropriate today, for example, on the frontiers of mission and in an atmosphere of pervasive unbelief which calls for a power encounter between Christ and Antichrist. But Scripture itself suggests that these will be special cases, rather than “a part of daily life”.’ (Authentic Christianity, 387)

But note that Paul does not seek to legitimise his ministry by an appeal to apostolic signs. He regarded as surer evidence of the genuineness of his ministry his faithful evangelism and the resulting establishment of congregations of believers, 2 Cor 3:1-3; 5:11-13; 10:7.